• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

D&D (2024) Can A Spell Caster Out Damage a Martial Consistently?

In my experience it is extremely rare for a store to have significant amount of healing potions. The only time I've seen a player stock up on those sorts of numbers what when players asked "Do they sell healing potions?" and when the DM said "Yes." they didn't ask how many, they just marked down gold and added potions to their inventory.
In a large city, you could probably buy a significant amount of them by visiting multiple different shops that sell them, but assuming that every shop has everything in the adventuring gear section of the PHB, let alone in significant quantities, would seem to indicate an extremely accommodating DM.

Over a thousand gold at level 2 seems very unusual. IME parties generally don't even have the gold to pick up full plate by pooling resources at level 5 given their other expenses. I'm pretty sure I've played LMOP and we didn't have that amount of cash.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I don't think it is unique at all. I am a believer in AI and use it extensively for art in my games (both as a DM and a player) but I have never played a D&D game without a real flesh and blood DM (not counting video games like BG3).

I think a game where the DM says you can't buy standard PHB adventuring gear is what would be uncommon.

Also as I mentioned earlier, in terms of funds, most published WOTC adventures provide treasure aplenty to do that, so it would need to be the DM saying something is specifically not available for it not to be and as noted by Ezekiel - the DMG says specifically that common magic items are "often" available in towns. That means sometimes they might not be, but they frequently are.

TBH if a DM is going to limit how much standard adventuring gear we can buy, I would expect that to come up in session 0 and I would be pretty annoyed if he told me I could only buy 1 or 2 potions after we were 5 sessions in.

Finally, I will offer an example from early 2024 play of something that dramatically played and how the DM handled it: The first 2024 1-20 campaign one of my regular groups played we noticed a Rings of Resistance is no longer attunement. At the end of the campaign everyone in the party EXCEPT my PC had a ring of resistance for every damage type - essentially full time, permanent resistance to all damage. I did not have it, but I could have I just didn't bother (I did have 3 or 4 of them myself). This was something new in 2024 because of the new 2024 rules and attunement change. After that campaign the DM houseruled that a player can only wear 2 magic rings at once. Totally sensible houserule, but he made it in session 0 AFTER the campaign with most PCs having 10 rings of resistance, not in the middle of that campaign. In the first campaign he let it go specifically because he did not mention it in session 0.
The point I made about d&d online was not a GM simply saying that "you can't buy standard phb adventuring gear", it was about the GM providing the gold to buy dozens of consumable items healing potions and then shrugging it off when players decide to do so. I think that that very much leads into another way that your games are unlike anything most would consider normal.
  • In another thread you mentioned that you had played through several 1-20 5e games complete with a specific number. In that and other threads you've commented about how those groups tend to advance at a speed averaging a level or more per session
  • In this and other threads you've brought up suggested treasure rewards as a shield for various expenditures like one might use the old WBL tables
  • It's not uncommon for a GM to use those recommended treasure/WBL tables as a rule of thumb for what to grant players when starting at higher level, especially with one shots
.

Your gameplay descriptions come off more like you are describing a series of one shots that happen to have the same characters leveled across them on the most technical of technicalities. Doing that cuts out a ton of smaller encounters and adventuring hazards that would normally be responsible for burning up some of those consumable potions that other posters dubiously questioned you about your party actually according. Take the benefits of cutting out so much of the red line of travel stuff to reduce injuries and expenses on things like healing potion kegs and supplement it with the recommended party wealth gains that come with "ok guys come back +N levels next week after splitting the difference in wealth gain and it becomes trivial to afford the dozens of healing potions in this thread or the mass costume jewelry levels of rings in others.

IoW it doesn't matter if you are being questioned on a one off edge case game where aTHE unusual element of that game/group was your partystacking up to a huge pile of 1-20 games when most people don't even play one game 1-20, if you are being questioned because it's really unusual for multiple players to have bunch of energy resistance rings, or if it's really unusual for players to go out with dozens of healing potions because You always present that one element as totally normal because that ONE element could fit within x & y guideline. However when all of those are taken together it's clear that it doesn't matter if it could fit within x & y guidelines because the games making up your experience seems to always be so far outside the norm that they are the very definition of so you take a spherical cow & too many elements are being extended so far outside the norm for it to matter if any of them could individually fit within the guidelines of x&y

There are other big problems with your post though and @Maxperson are correctly questioned what I'll go beyond with an explanation of why it's wrong since I'm very familiar with both the discrepancy as well as what happened to cause it because I witnessed the shift from running AL regularly. Wotc's hard cover adventures have not contained the level of wealth you describe for quite some time. The earlier ones could have, but at some point they shifted the printed treasure rewards to fit the AL guidelines be ALGMs would often say "well yea your right that normally this adventure you showed up to has $item here [where you obviously memorized it before joining my table] but AL doesn't give treasure like that because it uses a different method where you just pick from the ALPG tables at the levels it gives you stuff. Prior to that style of AL treasure there was far more treasure in the HC adventures (the shift eS stark and obvious)players had to see it in an adventure they played and record it on a pointless sheet and buy it from gold obtained from the all totally real games recorded on that pointless sheet. The other problem is with the status of healing potions

Having healing potions on the mundane adventuring gear table is something that 5e is erroneously given a lot of credit for, but it's not the first or best edition at doing that. Back in 3.x there were CLW wands and similar with slightly better healing per gp. Sure there were some 3.x GM's who wouldn't give those out in treasure or made buying them difficult, but they were still craftable & in all three cases they were a better implementation because reckless use of those wands ate into the treasure found and gold available to purchase better gear for the expected magic item churn would be reduced by the reckless expenditures. In the 2e DMG you get where healing potions were first made readily available with saying "A potion of healing is a fairly necessary item, something the DM may want to be readily available to the characters. Therefore, itshould be cheap, costing no more than 200 gp." On pg 120, but it too had extensive advice on getting treasure right and gm+player collaboration on finding/creating new magic items without trivializing the game or brewing boredom by rewarding reckless Monty haul fueled expenditures
'
Edit: and I'm extremely skeptical that the older hc adventures published before the AL treasure changes had enough treasure buried in them to add up as high as you are implying unless you look exclusively at the 3.x reprints that still used the 3.x WBL pegged treasure and even then I'm doubtful that it has so much.
 
Last edited:

And this, too, is part of the problem with these types of threads: people pretend that extraordinarily unlikely circumstances, or massive outright defiance of the explicit text, or the nebulous never-defined "situation" or "context" etc., somehow make probability and numbers totally 100% irrelevant and easily dismissed. Usually with BS non-arguments like "white room" etc.

The example I cited is extreme, as I noted in my post. But it is not uncommon at all for a martial to outdamage a caster consistently in play.



Quite obviously FrogReaver is talking about consistency. Do you think spellcasters can consistently, reliably, testably, outdamage sword and board characters?

CAN or DO? Can yes. Any class CAN outdamage another.

In play do not think full casters routinely, consistently outdamage sword and board PCs in most gaming groups. I think that is relatively rare and most of the time the sword and board PC is doing more damage than the cull casters.



One-in-a-million chances happen about once in a million attempts. You don't hinge plans on one-in-a-million chances unless you have no other choice.

Sure, but just because numbers statistically show that it is theoretically possible for spell casters to have a numerical statistical advantage in DPR does not mean that is what happens in play.

Since I started playing 2024 there is only one game I played where s full caster (Druid) is even competitive in terms of DPR with the top martial in the group (Monk). At level 16 they are the top two in a campaign I am in now and the Druid has been one of the top since level 7 (before level 7 the Monk was in a league of his own). Over the whole campaign the Monk is better, if we talk only since level 7 I can't tell you who is higher. They are both way ahead of the Ranger, Paladin/Rogue and Cleric in the group (and the Cleric who is a full caster too is at the very bottom). The Druid and Monk are clearly #1 and #2 from level 7-16.

Every other 2024 campaign I have played the martials are the highest consistent damage dealers.


You hinge plans around what is most likely, most expected, most probable.

Few groups actually play that way and even if they did, most of the time the magic you have on hand will drive how that actually works, not what class people are playing.

For example in the gaming group I mentioned above:
The Monk is wielding two Dragontooth Daggers and has the nick feat. With FOB that is 6d10+3d6+28 and he has enough ki that it is essentially at will. Without using any resources it is 4d10+3d6+18.

The Druid has a Wand of Fireballs that augments the slots he spends on Conjure Woodland Beings, driving his damage up substantially.

The Ranger is a Fey Wanderer and has a Wand of Fear, Wand of Paralyzation and Staff of Frost. With those 3 items, Summon Fey and Cause Fear through magic initiate he is rarely attacking himself despite being a martial.
 
Last edited:

The point I made about d&d online was not a GM simply saying that "you can't buy standard phb adventuring gear", it was about the GM providing the gold to buy dozens of consumable items healing potions and then shrugging it off when players decide to do so. I think that that very much leads into another way that your games are unlike anything most would consider normal.
  • In another thread you mentioned that you had played through several 1-20 5e games complete with a specific number. In that and other threads you've commented about how those groups tend to advance at a speed averaging a level or more per session
  • It's not uncommon for a GM to use those recommended treasure/WBL tables as a rule of thumb for what to grant players when starting at higher level, especially with one shots
.

They are not one-shots. They are all campaings published by WOTC or another 3p publisher, in some cases converted older material. Here is the list of 1-20 campaigns I have played end-to-end in the last two years, with the xception of the 1E conversion all of these are 5E published campaigns.

Moonshae Adventures (milestone)
Descent Into Avernus followed by Chains of Asmodeus (milestone)
Lair of Etharis (milestone) - This was like a bunch of one-shots but we did not know this when we bought it
Where Evil Lives (milestone)
Doomed Forgotten Realms (XP)
Temple of Elemental Evil-Giants-Drow conversion from 1E (XP) - we are currently level 16 in this.
Storm Kings Thunder followed by Vecna Eve of Ruin (milestone)
Rise of the Drow (XP)

The 1E conversion is a pretty straight conversion of TOEE and GDQ and as I understand it he used the exact loot and most of the exact monsters redone to 5E from the original. I will say with the monsters in that campaign, we leveled a lot faster than the campaign books would indicate. We left the Temple at level 12, I believe it is supposed to be level 8 (in 1E).

  • In this and other threads you've brought up suggested treasure rewards as a shield for various expenditures like one might use the old WBL tables


I am not sure what this even means, but I don't think it was me. In most of the games I play the DM does not give out awards to players, he gives out whatever published loot is in the adventure.
 

In my experience it is extremely rare for a store to have significant amount of healing potions.

According to the DMG towns should "often" have common magic items available for sale.



Over a thousand gold at level 2 seems very unusual. IME parties generally don't even have the gold to pick up full plate by pooling resources at level 5 given their other expenses. I'm pretty sure I've played LMOP and we didn't have that amount of cash.

to be clear 1500gp at level 5 (not level 2) and the cost of Plate is what I am using to baseline that as most PCs that wear heavy armor are in plate by level 5.

For people saying it is rare for PCs to have much money, I will point out there are other threads on this board that talk about PCs having too much money to even spend and asking what the DM should do about it to make gold useful:

 
Last edited:

They are not one-shots. They are all campaings published by WOTC or another 3p publisher, in some cases converted older material. Here is the list of 1-20 campaigns I have played end-to-end in the last two years, with the xception of the 1E conversion all of these are 5E published campaigns.

Moonshae Adventures (milestone)
Descent Into Avernus followed by Chains of Asmodeus (milestone)
Lair of Etharis (milestone) - This was like a bunch of one-shots but we did not know this when we bought it
Where Evil Lives (milestone)
Doomed Forgotten Realms (XP)
Temple of Elemental Evil-Giants-Drow conversion from 1E (XP) - we are currently level 16 in this.
Storm Kings Thunder followed by Vecna Eve of Ruin (milestone)
Rise of the Drow (XP)

The 1E conversion is a pretty straight conversion of TOEE and GDQ and as I understand it he used the exact loot and most of the exact monsters redone to 5E from the original. I will say with the monsters in that campaign, we leveled a lot faster than the campaign books would indicate. We left the Temple at level 12, I believe it is supposed to be level 8 (in 1E).




I am not sure what this even means, but I don't think it was me. In most of the games I play the DM does not give out awards to players, he gives out whatever published loot is in the adventure.
It doesn't matter if it's a one shot or not you play through a full hc adventure going 1-20 in a couple months but approach each session like a bunch of one shots because the end result is still going to be an experience that is very far outside the norm that is unlikely to provide much value for comparison to anything outside that extremely specific style of mmo-like gameplay where dozens of potions and multiple rings of resistance are a common experience at the table
 

It's an interesting thing, that, (TYPICAL martial) is the operating term. I would say, typical is sort of the analysis issue here in that the meta probably runs ALOT of dmg-nova focus (battlemaster with their limited dice count to be super special for a brief time).
I mean there's probably hundreds of thousands of variations of martials. I don't think it's very meaningful to say 'aha, one martial out of all of them can do this thing'. My use of typical is meant to carve out space for that kind of exception while still maintaining the ability to generalize.

IMO. We either talk in generalizations to some degree or the terms martial and caster becomes meaningless themselves.

I've made several grindy, defensive feat, Defensive fighting style martials with more passive potential and when they aren't built to TYPICAL meta they outgrind just about anyone else. If you've ever seen just a "boring" ole' toughness build champion with protection next to an ancient oath pali with protection, they can adventure so long just off their passives. Particularly, if you are well-adapted to going into encounters without a full life total. So IMO, if built accordingly, more martials would be set for the grind without rest than casters just off the nature of the classes. This becomes particularly evident when the grinders that are built to handle dmg are bypassed via good encounter craft and the casters take dmg, they aren't built with as much wiggle room usually even if you are sadistic enough to REALLY buck the meta and build a sticky full caster.

It's really easy to build a survivable caster though. And without having to sacrifice very much.
1. You inherently have ranged options in a game where many enemies are either melee only or vastly more dangerous in melee.
2. You can easily level dip for armor if you don't have it.
3. You can get the shield spell via magic initiate origin feat, or worst case via single level multiclass.
4. You can use a few spell choices on various mobility, defense, summon and control spells to aid your survivability.
5. You can often maintain a strong control spell (either precast or cast on round 1) and spend the rest of the time dodging, while still having a large impact on combat.

And of course there's options for even tankier caster builds.

Melee focused martials though typically have to make significant sacrifices in order to layer in strong survivability.
1. If they want really good AC by taking a shield they give up alot of damage potential and possibly ranged potential as well.
2. They still need a way to handle enemies wanting to maintain range (either mobility, a servicable ranged attack, etc).
3. If they want high damage they typically need a feat, but their defensive options also come from feats.
4. A large portion of their damage comes from abilities that have offensive and defensive options. Reckless attack, battlemaster dice, smite spell slots. If one plays more defensively this even further tanks their damage.

It's very difficult to build an effective martial character focused on defense.

Long ramble there. But, if you are talking consistency being at question over long adventures without much pause I feel like martials typically will give you the most wiggle room but with the least "flash" but consistency isn't really flashy
For what it's worth, one of my favorite characters was a Bear Barbarian/Swashbuckler Rogue back in 2014 rules with a fondness for grappling, high mobility, and utilizing sneak attack for strong opportunity attacks. I very rarely reckless attacked. I went more of a con focus than str or dex. My damage was a bit lower than it could have been, but as long as I was raging I was virtually unkillable (or at least the other PC's would die long before I would. This worked well only because I had enough control options and super high mobility layered into the build.

So yes, there's an example of an effective yet highly defensive martial, and yet I still had to really sacrifice damage potential. It pretty much required swashbuckler rogue for mobility, opportunity attack damage scaling and grappling ability.

But here's the thing. I don't actually think this character was more effective than something as simple as any spirit guardians cleric that primarily dodges when enemies are attacking him and that's without considering the rest of the cleric kit.
 


It doesn't matter if it's a one shot or not you play through a full hc adventure going 1-20 in a couple months but approach each session like a bunch of one shots because the end result is still going to be an experience that is very far outside the norm that is unlikely to provide much value for comparison to anything outside that extremely specific style of mmo-like gameplay where dozens of potions and multiple rings of resistance are a common experience at the table


As I said, with the exception of LOE they are not one-shots and they are not played each session like a one-shot. You are NOT describing my experience or how I play.

I will say it again: I am not playing a series of one shots, not in the way they are published and not in how we play them. It is not an "MMO style" of play. I've been playing D&D for 45 years, some of the players I play with have been playing since then as well. I was playing D&D long before MMOs or VTTs or laptop computers were even a thing.

Further the rules did not even allow more than 3 rings of resistance until 2024 because they were attunement. So no that is not common and if you actually read what I posted you would realize that. That happened in ONE campaign right after the 2024 rules were published and it was stopped with a house rule the very next campaign with that DM.

Also, I play with multiple DMs and in multiple groups so this is not specific to one group.
 

As I said, with the exception of LOE they are not one-shots and they are not played each session like a one-shot. You are NOT describing my experience or how I play.

I will say it again: I am not playing a series of one shots, not in the way they are published and not in how we play them. It is not an "MMO style" of play. I've been playing D&D for 45 years, some of the players I play with have been playing since then as well. I was playing D&D long before MMOs or VTTs or laptop computers were even a thing.

Further the rules did not even allow more than 3 rings of resistance until 2024 because they were attunement. So no that is not common and if you actually read what I posted you would realize that. That happened in ONE campaign right after the 2024 rules were published and it was stopped with a house rule the very next campaign with that DM.

Also, I play with multiple DMs and in multiple groups so this is not specific to one group.
You are ignoring the point.

When you level up every session or yso sometimes more than one level it's going to play out with an experience closer to how a normal group showing up to play a one shot of a particular dungeon than it would if that group was playing through with normal progression.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top
OSZAR »